House GOP drops ObamaCare’s medical-device tax from new bill, final cave looming

posted at 4:01 pm on October 15, 2013 by Allahpundit

The most pitiful part of what’s happening right now isn’t the cave itself, which was predictable since day one of the quixotic “defund” effort, but the fact that they’re going to drag it out another day or two to the bitter end purely for theatrical purposes. There’s a 99 percent chance that Reid will reject whatever emerges tonight from the House, leaving Boehner to float a clean debt-ceiling hike tomorrow and let Pelosi and the Democrats bail him out, but in order to marginally reduce the upset among grassroots conservatives, he’s going to push this to the last possible moment. That means passing — hopefully — one more House bill to show that he really did try to get something in return for raising the debt limit, even though what he and House Republicans are now asking for barely qualifies as “something.”

Now that the medical-device tax is out, the already weak House bill has even fewer ObamaCare-related demands in it than it did this morning. And the punchline is, it’s been pulled not as a concession to Obama but because House conservatives regard it as a giveaway to business lobbyists. As James Antle put it, “So the only easily gettable Obamacare concession is out because Rs can’t sell it as Obamacare concession.”

Conservatives complained today that delaying the [medical-device] tax would be “crony capitalism” and they can’t sell it to the Republican base as a viable Republican win.

But that swift change hasn’t stalled the GOP’s push for a Tuesday vote. “The leaders are giving us one more chance to get something passed out of the House before the Senate does its thing,” says a veteran House Republican. “I think we’ll get it through, at least that’s my sense of things now. We want to do something that marks our position, so we don’t end up swallowing whatever terrible bait the Senate casts our way. Now, I know, and the majority of us know, that this is futile. But believe me, even getting to 218 on this plan will be an achievement.”…

House insiders say Boehner’s fear is that conservative activists and powerful conservative groups start to align against the bill and rattle its fragile coalition. If that happens, and the bill’s support falls apart, a simple, six-week debt-ceiling extension is still in the leadership’s back pocket, but there’s no plan to bring that up anytime soon. More likely, should things fizzle on the whip front, is that another conference meeting is called and the House GOP “gets real,” as one Boehner ally puts it, about “what’s possible within divided government, and whether Republicans are willing to back anything at all.”

Translation: The leadership’s going to make one last stand tonight to show conservative voters that they really fought on this, even though what they’re now fighting for is worthless to everyone, and then inform House conservatives tomorrow that they have no choice but to pass some sort of clean debt-ceiling hike with Democratic help. That’s because “what’s possible within divided government” was painfully apparent two weeks ago, but if Boehner had caved then instead of now, he would have been accused of not “trying.” So he went through the motions of trying, up to and including a shutdown, and now it’s time to do the responsible thing and not risk a new recession with a technical default. Meanwhile, the Senate isn’t doing anything right now except waiting to see if Boehner can get anything passed through the House with Republican votes. If he can’t, then Reid will might well end up demanding that even the token concessions to the GOP in his bill with McConnell be dropped. After all, it’ll be Democrats who are now the main actors in passing something in the lower chamber, not Republicans.

Update: Look it at this way: Repealing the medical-device tax was always going to be a lame “concession.” Why bother?

GOP aide marvels that tea party right forced Boehner to leave out repeal of a tax. "I feel like I'm in the twilight zone"

Update: Moderate GOPer Devin Nunes tells CNN there’s a new House Republican bill in the works — an almost clean debt-ceiling hike until early February and a bill to fund the government until December 15, setting up an exciting second shutdown just before Christmas. (In theory. In practice, Boehner won’t want to re-live this nightmare.) I say “almost clean” because the one concession Nunes mentioned for raising the ceiling is passing the Vitter amendment denying subsidies to Congress and staff. Reid won’t like that, but whether he’s prepared to force a default over making sure his aides get taxpayer money for their health care is a separate question.

Bash brought up comments Nunes made the day before the shutdown, calling his Republican colleagues gung-ho on Obamacare “lemmings with suicide vests.” Nunes told Bash he doesn’t consider these people conservative because “to be a conservative you have to know how to count” and they can’t take on this “lunacy” because “you have to be here to actually conserve something” in the future.

Update: Yep, the big cave comes tomorrow.

Download from top R: "If this bill passes tonight, we say, Harry, your call, protect Congress or be fair to American people and end this…"

The Vitter thing is just a tiny fig leaf to placate populists. They’re going to stick it to Congress (or, more specifically, congressional staffers) in lieu of achieving any concessions on ObamaCare.

Update from Duane Patterson: The big question, with the big cave coming by 9:30pm Eastern, is why the House is setting itself up to cave three times in four months? If the decision has been made to offer the clean C.R. and clean debt ceiling hike, why not pass one that gets through 2014 so that at least the sequester cuts are locked in? Right now, the C.R. would be extended only to December 15th, leaving a month before the spending levels are locked in and implemented for next year. Harry Reid has already signaled that the only clean C.R. he’d accept would be before January 15th, because he believes he can make the Republicans cave on the sequester cuts, too. Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell also is believed to have wanted to extend the C.R. out a year. So what happened?

There are several House Republicans who are values or religious liberty Congressmen, who are appalled that beginning on January 1st, the Sisters of the Poor and other religious groups are going to essentially have to shut down because of Obamacare’s requirement that they provide insurance that includes abortifacients, birth control and other abortion coverage. They will simply shutter rather than comply, and so this bloc has successfully pitched the idea of a December 15th C.R., hoping, literally praying, that Obama will see the error of his ways and negotiate by then.

Here’s the problem with that. Let’s say the President hardens his heart and says no. This same voting bloc, along with all of the other members of the House, have no stomach to shut the government down again a week before Christmas, so they will have to cave then, too.

Then you have the debt ceiling coming back around in February, which makes one wonder what leverage the Republicans will have then that they don’t have now. So in short, we’re setting ourselves up to cave three times for the price of one.

The only thumb in the eye, and it’s quite simply just that, is the Vitter Amendment, something Team Reid hates with a passion. The House leadership has included it into their ‘final offer’ as a one finger salute to the Senate Majority Leader, and there is a rumor going around that after the vote tonight, Boehner is sending the House home, thinking they can jam the Senate. But since I’m here updating Allah’s post, I might as well channel Allah and ponder what the headlines will be once the House does pass this and fly home, and Reid simply takes the Vitter Amendment out and passes the clean C.R. and debt ceiling again, and sends it to a vacant House as the debt ceiling clock hits Doomsday O’Clock?

I’m sure there is good news in here somewhere. It just might take an awfully long time to find it.

Update From Duane Patterson: And just as quickly as I wrote this above, the deal is off. The House GOP whipped their members earlier in the afternoon, saying if any of you have a problem with this deal, let us know now. Apparently, enough of them did, because as of 5:50pm Eastern, the House Rules Committee has cancelled the consideration of the package for tonight and no votes are scheduled. They don’t have the votes, and we’re right back to square one.

Almost simultaneously, the White House signaled the President would veto any language that included the Vitter amendment, which would make Congressional and Administration staffers abide by Obamacare just the same as you and I do. I’m a little torn here. Part of me is glad we’re not going along with this deal tonight, for the reasons I stated above. But part of me would love to have the opportunity to make the case that Obama indicated that Harry Reid’s and his own staffers’ exemption from the law is worth more than the country’s creditworthiness. That would have been fun. Alas.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Comments

Where have you been, riding V-ger out of the solar system, we hate ALL of it, the Congressional waiver thingie is simply tapping into the naturally existing public abhorrence of politicians.

Bishop on October 15, 2013 at 7:36 PM

Wow, what a clever turn of phrase. You are one of those “hip” conservatives, you watch Star Trek, we get it.

You hate all of it, we get that too. Unfortunately, the rest of the country doesn’t, unless they want single-payer, and you invented a fake issue to try to convince them otherwise.

Obamacare DIDN’T create an exception for Congress. Obama did.

And, no, do not repeal the Grassley Amendment.

Resist We Much on October 15, 2013 at 7:43 PM

Wrong, even Grassley says his amendment didn’t preclude gov’t/employer support for Congress/staffer health care. Obamacare is not about the employer-based health care system that effects about 80% of the population, it is about everything else. The only large employer in the nation forced to push some or all of its employees onto the exchanges is Obamacare, thanks to Grassley. All Obama did was give them back what they, and any other employee of a large organization, already had, an employer contribution, same as you get at say, Koch Industries.

The entire controversy over Grassley/Vitter is fake, which is why the country isn’t buying it.

I can’t figure out why, when Boehner passes a bill that he believes is bi-partisan and good for the country he doesn’t adjourn the House and send it on to the Senate. Let the Senate and Obama keep playing their games because then it will be they who refuse to compromise and they who shut down the government. Good Lord John, get some cajones and lead. You know Obama won’t.

When you’re negotiating with someone, whose only goal is to completely destroy you , you have to fight the good fight, not try to fight and then surrender. Boehner needs to lead like he’s the Speaker of the House, the 2nd in line to the Presidency, a force to be dealt with. Leading means putting together a bill that will pass the House. Then, once it’s passed, send it to the Senate. Let Reid scream how he can’t get it through the Senate, hell let the Senate Republicans do the right thing for a change and tell Reid he will lose all of their support if he doesn’t change his tune. Instead, the Senate Republicans keep on throwing the House Republicans under the bus.

“Because the basic theory is, look, everybody here at some point or another is going to need medical care, and you can’t be a free-rider on everybody else,” said Obama.

The tax/fine on a person making $43K who doesn’t want or can’t afford insurance will only equal about $860 (vs. thousands in premiums and deductibles), and $860 will barely cover any actual medical procedure.

Hospitals will still be required by law to provide care regardless of insurance coverage or ability to pay.

Can you explain how Obamacare does anything to change the free rider problem?

Technically no, you provided the perfect recitation of the DNC talking points you were given.

I’ll ignore the laughable and baseless assertion that I was given DNC talking points and focus instead on the “Technically no” you opened with. You’re being critical of me for reciting the plain truth. I didn’t say you had to be happy about the truth (I’m certainly not) but the fact you and I don’t like it doesn’t change the fact it’s true.

But that doesn’t mean we should accept it as given truth any more than Scott v. Sandford should have been accepted as given law.

There’s just a bit of reductio ad absurdum going on here.

Face it, you’re a tool of the left. If you don’t already know that, you’ll be happier once you accept it.

Happy Nomad on October 15, 2013 at 8:21 PM

The ability to recognize a situation, even an unpleasant one, does not make a person a tool of the left. It’s possible to understand something without cheering for it. The inability to deal with an unpleasant truth does make someone divorced from reality though. We won’t be able to start to get out of this mess for real if we can’t even be honest with ourselves.

The ability to recognize a situation, even an unpleasant one, does not make a person a tool of the left.

alchemist19 on October 15, 2013 at 8:39 PM

You’re failing to see the obvious.

It could have worked if conservatives had maintained their resolve. People claiming that something can’t work damages that resolve.

Think about a bunch of troops holding a line. If they are all resolved to hold the line, then the line has a chance of being held. If some of them start claiming that retreats will inevitably occur, then other troopers start to lose their confidence that they will be supported.

That’s because “what’s possible within divided government” was painfully apparent two weeks ago, but if Boehner had caved then instead of now, he would have been accused of not “trying.” So he went through the motions of trying, up to and including a shutdown, and now it’s time to do the responsible thing and not risk a new recession with a technical default

There is no such thing as a technical default

You refuse to make the interest payment on the debt, or you pay it.

The interest payment on the debt is chump change for Obama. He already announced the printing press Queen would continue to roll out vapor dollars now at a rate of 85 billion a month, treasuries bought from ourselves and worthless mortgage backed securities to cover his banker buddies. Current monthly interest on the debt under 20 billion

Of course we are taking in way way more than 20 billion monthly in real tax revenue. The argument the money is required by law to go to Sesame Street instead of preventing default is a joke. Obama disregards the law routinely.

The vapor money is not merely to ‘cover shortfall’. It is to deflate the interest rates, to keep the market up, for his buddies, and for the next election. As long as he is counterfeiting, he might as well spill some of the stolen future of America on the miniscule debt service since in the not so long run, this stolen vapor money will so raise the debt service he will be unable to cover his tracks by counterfeiting.

As a longtime Detroiter, I can vouch Obama is running the US into the ground the same way the jokers ran Detroit under, right down to the lavish lifestyle , letting infrastructure rot, despising the past, mortgaging the future, ignoring the law, taking care of cronies, and encouraging division. Barack Coleman Young Kwame Obama. No difference.

Palin is correct. If Obama calls a default, it is because he refuses to pay up.

Germany 1929, the Nazi Party is diminishing, prosperity is increasing. Although the Weimar Republic is paying back massive reparations to France and Germany, those countries are in debt up to their eyeballs to Wall Street bankers who loaned them the money to fight the war. Wall Street is in turn loaning the money back to Germany fueling the boom.

Wall Street collapses and calls in the loans in Germany. The German economy crashes, and the Nazis are resurgent. When the Nazis take power they repudiate the Versailles Treaty and start issuing government contracts. Furthermore, they guarantee bank loans to businesses, causing the money to start circulating again. The German economy boomed while ours still stagnated.

The downside is that they will need a war to create the markets they need to keep the scheme going, and the war eventually went very badly.

We’re borrowing money hand over fist and don’t even have a robust economy to show for it. We don’t have policies in place to grow the economy —on the contrary! On top of that we’re facing numerous small conflicts that waste our time and resources. All strategic goals seem to have been abandoned. We are leaderless and without a rational plan to succeed.

If key countries were to abandon our currency at this point we will be in such trouble that I don’t think most of us can even comprehend it.

If GOP had 2 of the 3 (House and POTUS) the Dems would be in the same spot the GOP finds itself now..:)
Dire Straits on October 15, 2013 at 8:46 PM

That’s funny. That’s how we stopped fanny Mae, SCHIP, NCLB and plugged the donut hole among others under bush. We even stopped mcvain-Feingold so SCOTUS wouldn’t have to step in. Oh wait… Even with the trifecta we were still caving to the donks. The donks were so between a rock and a hard place that Dubya never once had to use his veto pen, not even a threat.

It could have worked if conservatives had maintained their resolve. People claiming that something can’t work damages that resolve.

Think about a bunch of troops holding a line. If they are all resolved to hold the line, then the line has a chance of being held. If some of them start claiming that retreats will inevitably occur, then other troopers start to lose their confidence that they will be supported.

THIS is reality.

blink on October 15, 2013 at 8:43 PM

The problem is your metaphor isn’t the most appropriate to describe the situation. If you’re talking about troops fighting in a war it isn’t necessarily about numbers but when it’s about counting votes in a representative republic then numbers are the only thing that matters. Everyone’s vote counts the same no matter how strong or weak their resolve is and the Democrats have more votes than we do.

The problem is your metaphor isn’t the most appropriate to describe the situation.

alchemist19 on October 15, 2013 at 9:13 PM

There is no problem with my simile, and it was the most appropriate way to describe the situation.

If you’re talking about troops fighting in a war it isn’t necessarily about numbers

I didn’t imply that it was. It’s about unity. That was my whole point!

when it’s about counting votes in a representative republic then numbers are the only thing that matters.

There are enough R votes in the House to keep anything from passing that a united group of R’s didn’t want passed.

Everyone’s vote counts the same no matter how strong or weak their resolve is and the Democrats have more votes than we do.

I seems as if you’re trying not to understand. If you’re holding a line, then you are only doing so because you trust that your fellow troopers will hold the line, too. If they aren’t going to hold the line, they you are less likely to.

It works with votes, too. If you think that your fellow R’s are going to abandon the cause with their votes, then you are more likely to abandon the cause, too.

People like you were encouraging abandonment. That was damaging to the cause.

I seems as if you’re trying not to understand. If you’re holding a line, then you are only doing so because you trust that your fellow troopers will hold the line, too. If they aren’t going to hold the line, they you are less likely to.It works with votes, too. If you think that your fellow R’s are going to abandon the cause with their votes, then you are more likely to abandon the cause, too.People like you were encouraging abandonment. That was damaging to the cause.
blink on October 15, 2013 at 9:22 PM

Exactly. What we have here are CINOs. They talk the talk but quail before the fight.

What I’m for is picking our battles intelligently. There was never a realistic chance of knocking down Obamacare with the shutdown strategy because, as I pointed out earlier, the exchanges, the subsidies and the Medicaid expansion are all fully funded as part of mandatory spending so it would require another act of Congress to defund them. No amount of conservative resolve would change that hard, cold, unpleasant reality. The problem with “holding the line” against Obamacare is there was never any line to hold in the first place unless our goal was to shut down the government for its own sake and used the defunding of Obamacare as cover.

Let me ask it like this. If on October 1st when the shutdown started we had replaced all 232 GOP House members with clones of Jim DeMint then what would be different right now?

It’s fine for you to claim that it would be better to form a line in a different battle.

But don’t try claiming that nay-saying doesn’t have an effect on the integrity of a line. You’re dead wrong for making such a claim.

There was never a realistic chance of knocking down Obamacare with the shutdown strategy

YOU.ARE.DEAD.WRONG.

There was most certainly a realistic chance – IF naysayers like you hadn’t been continuously claiming that it wasn’t realistic.

Underdogs pull off upsets all the time. Often their success is due to resolve and confidence. If a team is surrounded by people telling them that they have no chance and constantly trying to make people give up, then their chances plunge.

Face it. People like you plunged the changes of success.

That would have been like Herb Brooks (circa Feb 1980) telling the media yeah, I told my players that they never had a chance to beat the Soviet hockey team – and I was right!

It’s fine for you to claim that it would be better to form a line in a different battle.

But don’t try claiming that nay-saying doesn’t have an effect on the integrity of a line. You’re dead wrong for making such a claim.

It appears that one man’s nay-saying is another’s rational observation that a certain scenario has no possibility of victory.

YOU.ARE.DEAD.WRONG.

There was most certainly a realistic chance – IF naysayers like you hadn’t been continuously claiming that it wasn’t realistic.

No there wasn’t. You are ignoring reality and you prove that in your next line.

Underdogs pull off upsets all the time. Often their success is due to resolve and confidence. If a team is surrounded by people telling them that they have no chance and constantly trying to make people give up, then their chances plunge.

Another bad metaphor. You’ve moved from war to sports but the problem is still the same. Victory in war doesn’t necessarily go to the person with the most soldiers, and games aren’t always won by the most talented players, but when it comes to passing legislation is a representative republic the first, last and only thing that matters is whether or not you have a majority of the votes. The GOP only has that in the House, and that alone is not enough to make a bill become law.

Face it. People like you plunged the changes of success.

That would have been like Herb Brooks (circa Feb 1980) telling the media yeah, I told my players that they never had a chance to beat the Soviet hockey team – and I was right!

blink on October 15, 2013 at 10:24 PM

Because that was about hockey and votes is about math. If the numbers are against you when it comes to votes you lose every time.

I’ll repeat and even expand on my previous question for you. If we had 232 clones of Jim DeMint in the House and 45 clones of DeMint in the Senate with Ted Cruz as minority leader then what would be different? What trick or tactic could they have employed in the last two weeks that Boehner and McConnell didn’t do that would have stopped the exchanges, Medicaid expansion or subsidies?

It appears that one man’s nay-saying is another’s rational observation that a certain scenario has no possibility of victory.

alchemist19 on October 15, 2013 at 10:39 PM

I agree that there can be a fine line, but in this case, you were nay-saying. You think it was rational observation because Obama and Reid seemed to be holding firm. But Obama and Reid were only holding firm because of all the nay-saying that they were hearing.

No there wasn’t.

Yes, there was.

Seriously, it doesn’t make sense to automatically assume that they could hold out longer than the Rs.

but when it comes to passing legislation is a representative republic the first, last and only thing that matters is whether or not you have a majority of the votes.

You can get the other side to defect. You can get the other side to cave. You can get the other side to surrender. That’s difficult to do when your own team is constantly being told by naysayers that they’re the ones that need to surrender and cave.

There was no reason to cave.

The GOP only has that in the House, and that alone is not enough to make a bill become law.

Then you maintain the shutdown. Then you refuse to raise the debt ceiling. Why not?

then what would be different?

Then the democrats would know that they need to cave in order to raise the debt ceiling and end the shutdown.

This isn’t rocket science. Why would you even ask such a simple question?

Raise the debt ceiling for one day. And just keep raising it one day at a time. Leave the government shut down.

besser tot als rot on October 15, 2013 at 4:29 PM

Keep this government shutdown and get Obama to shut down things that aren’t merely parks and memorials (GULP!) and maybe, just maybe, we’ll save upwards of 1 trillion dollars Obama would otherwise squander.

I agree that there can be a fine line, but in this case, you were nay-saying. You think it was rational observation because Obama and Reid seemed to be holding firm. But Obama and Reid were only holding firm because of all the nay-saying that they were hearing.

Obama and Reid didn’t do anything because they didn’t have to. Obamacare was going to be the law of the land so long as they took no action so they took no action.

Yes, there was.

Seriously, it doesn’t make sense to automatically assume that they could hold out longer than the Rs.

It doesn’t matter how long the Rs held out, Obamacare was already here. That’s why Obama did nothing.

You can get the other side to defect. You can get the other side to cave. You can get the other side to surrender. That’s difficult to do when your own team is constantly being told by naysayers that they’re the ones that need to surrender and cave.

There was no reason to cave.

Here, I think, is the root of our disagreement. We wouldn’t just need to get a few of the Democrats to cave, we would need a lot of them to and that’s not realistic.

First off I think (hope?) we can agree that Obama would never ever sign anything that undoes Obamacare. Obama never has to face the voters again so his popularity doesn’t matter to him anymore; his primary focus is his legacy. His biggest (and with the GOP holding the House, his likely only) domestic achievement is Obamacare. That’s all he has to show for his time in office. He would never agree to undo it. If that’s the case we would need a 2/3 majority in the Senate to override his veto. You’re talking about peeling off a third the Democrats to do that, most of whom voted for it the first time. It wasn’t ever going to happen.

Then you maintain the shutdown. Then you refuse to raise the debt ceiling. Why not?

Then the democrats would know that they need to cave in order to raise the debt ceiling and end the shutdown.

This isn’t rocket science. Why would you even ask such a simple question?

blink on October 15, 2013 at 11:05 PM

Because we still have Obamacare even with the shutdown, and the shutdown tactic isn’t popular. Obama’s free to take all the blame for the Democrats himself because he never has to face the voters again while the GOP is employing a convoluted strategy that doesn’t even directly accomplish its stated goal, and it has to explain that to the voters in a year.

This amendment eliminates Obama’s ability to provide the work-around that forced Congress to use Obamacare.

blink on October 15, 2013 at 10:17 PM

Now you are just flat out wrong. The Obama administration never tried to pull Congress and its staff out of the exchanges; they only sought to let the federal government, as the employer, subsidize the cost, as they had subsidized previous, non-exchange policies. The Vitter Amendment forbids the subsidy, and extends the Obamacare requirement to the executive branch.

No Exemption for Washington from Obamacare Act – Amends the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) to extend the requirement for participation in the American Health Benefit Exchange (a state health insurance exchange created by PPACA) to the President, Vice-President, executive branch political appointees, and employees of congressional committees and leadership offices of Congress (currently, this requirement applies to Members of Congress and their staff). Prohibits any government contribution to or subsidy for the health insurance coverage of such officials and employees.

“Because the basic theory is, look, everybody here at some point or another is going to need medical care, and you can’t be a free-rider on everybody else,” said Obama. “You can’t not have health insurance, then go to the emergency room, and each of us, who’ve done the responsible thing and have health insurance, suddenly we now have to pay the premiums for you. That’s not fair. So, if you can afford it, you should get health insurance just like you get car insurance.”

The tax/fine on a person making $43K who doesn’t want or can’t afford insurance will only equal about $860 (vs. thousands in premiums and deductibles), and $860 will barely cover any actual medical procedure.

Hospitals will still be required by law to provide care regardless of insurance coverage or ability to pay.

Can you explain how Obamacare does anything to change the free rider problem?

“Because the basic theory is, look, everybody here at some point or another is going to need medical care, and you can’t be a free-rider on everybody else,” said Obama.

The tax/fine on a person making $43K who doesn’t want or can’t afford insurance will only equal about $860 (vs. thousands in premiums and deductibles), and $860 will barely cover any actual medical procedure.

Hospitals will still be required by law to provide care regardless of insurance coverage or ability to pay.

Can you explain how Obamacare does anything to change the free rider problem?

1. WAIVERS ARE UN-CONSTITUTIONAL
The 2,200+ waivers Obama has handed out are Un-Constitutional, #1 because only CONGRESS can amend a law once it is passed, and #2 because the Constitution does not allow for specail treatment for a select few. Obama, a self-professed Constitutional Scholar, knows this and has held the nation hostage until the gutless GOP agree to abandon the Constitution (& their oath of office) & allow him to get away with his Un-Constitutional Waivers…and they have done just that.

2. CONGRESSIONAL / EXECUTIVE SPECIAL DEAL:
The GOP agreed to give Obama everything he wanted – full funding and waivers – as long as he agreed that EVERY Washington Politician (House & Senate AND Obama and his staff) participate in Obamacare AND PAY THEIR OWN PREMIUMS. Obama immediately rejected this plan. The American people WILL be FOTCED to participate, WILL be FORCED to pay up to 70% of the MILLIONAIRE Politicians’ Premiums, and Obama WILL NOT participate in his own Health Care System (because he KNOWS how badly it $ucks and that it will fail)! Once again the GOP SURRENDER.

3. MEDICAL DEVICE TAX:
Obama promised (among many other things) Obamacare would NOT contain any taxes. The USSC’s verdict (and e-write of the law) concluded the monetary penalty for not participating in Obamacare was only the FIRST Tax. The 2nd was a Medical Device Tax – a tax on every pace maker, cane, wheel chair, prosthetic, hearing aid, etc…which has forced many businesses to take their companies and jobs overseas. The GOP asked for this tax to be eliminated…then delayed 2 years…then delayed for 1 year…then conceded to accept (reportedly – again) NOTHING.

Obama has declared the GOP are blackmailing terrorists, but if you look at the dynamics of the situation you realize just the opposite is true. A ‘blackmailing terrorist’ is the one who gives demands and threatens harm if they are not met…that would be Obama. He even admitted to the nation that he was/is attempting to inflict as much pain on the American people as possible until they demand/beg the GOP to give him whatever he wants. Those who negotiate and continue to attempt to resolve the conflict are the ones BEING ‘blackmailed’.

So what was / are Obama’s demands?

1) Full Funding of the US Government through a clean ‘CR’ – no Budget. (None in 6 years, although required by law annually, and not since Reid took over in the Senate)

2) Full Funding of Obamacare

3) The GOP ABANDON / BETRAY their Oaths of Office / the Constitution by allowing Obama to keep his 2,200 Un-Constituional Waivers.

4) The American People MUST be FORCED to continue to pay up to 70% of the Obamacare Health Care Premiums for their Millionaire Politicians who com-pletely bent them over by forcing Obamacare into law against the majority will of the people WHILE telling them/us Americans do not have the RIGHT to know what was in the bill until they passed it into law.

5) The Debt Ceiling must be raised $1.1 TRILLION….which, according to Obama, doesn’t mean the US Govt intends to spend all of that.

** The definition of ‘INSANITY’ is doing the same thing over and over while expecting a different outcome each time. What Obama has done / is doing is holding the nation hostage until it/the GOP agrees to allow them to raise the debt ceiling by $1.1 Trillion so they can keep engaging in record-setting deficit spending. He fought the GOP & the American people so Liberals would not be forced to address the REAL core fiscal / economic problems that have resulted in us to the point where we have to raise the debt ceiling AGAIN because our out-of-control spending-addicted politicians refuse to ‘seek help/ a cure’ – they just want more money!

AND THE GOP WIL GIVE OBAMA EVERYTHING HE WANTS…

The reason why is simple:

The GOP actually want to save this nation from collapse and end the suffering Obama is inflicting….

While Obama, who promised to fundamentally change this country, is blackmailing us to abandon the Constitution and become some 3rd World Semi-Dictatorship…and he doesn’t mind if the Nation goes over the fiscal cliff and collapses. If that happens, he will just be completing his daddy’s work while making his tutor – Frank Marshall Davis – and his mentor – Jeremiah Wright – proud!